Hold Congress Accountable

About FreedomConnector

Find activists, groups, and events right in your own neighborhood. Join FreedomConnector to get involved and learn more about key issues threatening our economic freedom. Whether you’re looking for like-minded people, trying to boost your existing group’s impact, or simply trying to stay up on current events, FreedomConnector is the place to start. See what’s happening in your state today!

Blog Hit

EPA is the Real Threat to Our Power Grid

Following a sniper attack on electricity transformers last year in California, policy makers are now expressing concerns over the vulnerability of our power grid to a terrorist attack.

A Wall Street Journalstory, “U.S. Risks National Blackout From Small-Scale Attack,” reported on a study conducted by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) that concluded the U.S. could experience a nationwide blackout if a small number of power transmission stations were damaged.

The U.S. could suffer a coast-to-coast blackout if saboteurs knocked out just nine of the country’s 55,000 electric-transmission substations on a scorching summer day, according to a previously unreported federal analysis.

The study by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission concluded that coordinated attacks in each of the nation’s three separate electric systems could cause the entire power network to collapse, people familiar with the research said.

While an attack on our power grid is a risk, policy makers must not ignore the threat posed by the enemy from within; the Environmental Protection Agency.

EPA regulations are forcing hundreds of coal-fired power plants to close and the removal of a significant amount of power threatens the reliability of our power supply.

Matthew Wald’s story in The New York Times, “Coal to the Rescue, but Maybe Not Next Winter,” explores the impact of the loss of coal power on the price and reliability of our electricity supply.

Underlying the growing concern among consumers and regulators is a second phenomenon that could lead to even bigger price increases: Scores of old coal-fired power plants in the Midwest will close in the next year or so because of federal pollution rules intended to cut emissions of mercury, chlorine and other toxic pollutants. Still others could close because of a separate rule to prevent the damage that cooling water systems inflict on marine life.

For utilities, another frigid winter like this one could lead to a squeeze in supply, making it harder — and much more expensive — to supply power to consumers during periods of peak demand.

Senator Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, the ranking Republican on the Senate Energy Committee, told utility regulators in a speech on Feb. 11 that the recent frigid weather had provided “a glimpse of the challenge that lies ahead.” American Electric Power, which serves Columbus and a vast area of the Midwest, was running 89 percent of the coal plants that it must retire next year, she said.

“That raises a very serious question,” she said. “What happens when that capacity is gone?”

Obviously, the loss of coal plants that were needed this year will threaten the future reliability of power in many states. The Midwest region is not the only area that will suffer from the loss of coal-based electricity.

In a previous post on my recent Real Clear Energycommentary, “Blackouts and Worse: Dem Policies Killing New England,” I exposed the power shortage issues in that region because of the lack of energy diversity.

Through the EPA, President Obama is fundamentally transforming our electricity market. The consequences will be higher electricity prices and the likelihood of power shortages.

While we can’t afford to ignore the possibility of a terrorist attack on our power grid, policy makers should not be ignoring the real threat posed by the EPA.

Americans already face a $1.8 trillion regulatory burden. These heavy costs are passed on by businesses to consumers, who spend almost a quarter of their annual income complying with regulations often approved executive-level agencies, which have effectively become the fourth branch of the federal government.

We all know that Congress has some big ticket items on its agenda for next year - repealing ObamaCare, balancing the budget, reining the president’s executive authority, but receiving less attention than perhaps they should are a number of smaller regulatory battles in which the new Republican majority could make a real difference.

American Energy to the Rescue
Americans want a robust economy with upper mobility. Increasingly, they realize the policies and the arrogance of Obama, Pelosi, and Reid have severely retarded our economic growth.

As one of our over 6.6 million FreedomWorks activists nationwide, I urge you to contact your representative and ask him or her to vote YES on the Waters of the United States Regulatory Overreach Act, H.R. 5078. Sponsored by Rep. Steve Southerland, this bill would stop another massive overreach of authority by the Environmental Protection Agency that threatens the property rights of thousands of Americans.

The Pebble Project would not only bring a new copper and gold mine to Alaska, it would bring an economic boom to the region with nationwide effects. Too bad that it was blocked by the EPA before it was even given a chance.

Precedent is a powerful thing. Once something has been established as acceptable behavior, there will inevitably be a flood of eager followers. That is why trailblazers get all the credit. The brave souls who test the waters, who first go where no one else dares, who push the envelope and set the stage for the rest of us. In many walks of life, such as science, exploration, and philosophy, these people are heroes, pushing mankind forward even when it is dangerous to do so. In politics, however, the trailblazer all too often covers territory that would have been better left unexplored.

UPDATE: FreedomWorks activists sent over 4,000 messages to the EPA to stop the proposed rule that would have given the agency the power to garnish the wages of private citizens. A notice published in the Federal Register formally withdrew the rule. The EPA had previously stated that they would withdraw the rule if adverse comments were received by August 1.

When the Clean Water Act was first conceived, the EPA could only restrict entrepreneurs when they attempted to pollute bodies of water that were used by their fellow businesses, or what the EPA calls ‘navigable waters.’ However, its original mission is far too modest for modern-day bureaucrats.

Monday’s Supreme Court ruling on the EPA is getting some confused news coverage from people unsure of the actual impact of the Court’s decision. First of all, it is important to note that this case has nothing to do with the recent, controversial expansion of the EPA’s powers as adeptly covered by Julie Borowski here. Instead, this case addressed an earlier attempt from the EPA to solidify its ability to broadly regulate greenhouse gas emissions for virtually everyone in the United States.

Despite the fact that the vast majority of black voters are Democrats and support President Obama, there’s a growing anti-establishment, anti-Democrat and anti-Obama trend that’s percolating in the black community.